“That was a fun session we had yesterday,” said Chetan Bhagat as we sat on the Diggi Palace front lawns watching Pico Iyer talking with William Dalrymple, “but I wish they had scheduled it for Saturday or Sunday instead of a Friday morning. Most of my readers are working-class people – they don’t have the luxury of taking time off on a weekday to come for an event like this. Still,” he said thoughtfully, “it was nice that they thought of inviting schoolchildren, and that the teachers brought them along. It livened things up.”
The last sentence is an understatement. The “Chetan Bhagat in Conversation” session at the Jaipur lit-fest was a huge success that ended with the author being mobbed by autograph-seekers and media outside the Durbar hall. The last time I saw such frequent and enthusiastic applause inside this hall while a discussion was in progress was three years ago, when Shobha De held court over an audience that included several college-girls with giant stars in their eyes.
Chetan was also being modest when he gave the schoolchildren credit for livening things up. Actually, it was all him. He was spontaneous, witty in his distinct, earthy style, and connected with his audience in a way that few public speakers manage (it helped, of course, that the hall was filled with people who had read and enjoyed his books). Namita Gokhale and I were co-moderating the session but we were redundant, which is something I thoroughly approve of being when up on a stage. Before the session, I had prepared a token list of questions: about Chetan’s fractious relationship with critics, the vehemence that he seems to invite from people who are obsessed with preserving the Integrity of Literature, and the kneejerk inverse snobbery that he himself has sometimes responded with. But once the session began, I realised that this was not the time or place to discuss these heavyweight matters. What the audience mostly wanted was for Chetan to speak about himself, and to ask him their own questions.
There were lots of quotable quotes from him, most of which I neglected to take down. Commenting on his spurts of defensiveness, Chetan said, “I’m a sensitive person, and I do sometimes react if people keep saying ‘He sucks. He sucks.’ It’s almost like a style statement for me now!”
During the session, I brought up my conversation with Tushar Raheja a couple of years ago (see this post about mass-market fiction) – about Raheja wondering why anyone would spend Rs 400 or Rs 500 on a book when he could go out for a meal with his girlfriend for that money, and how this indicated a growing willingness among some readers and writers to look at a book as a product like any other. It was, of course, the decision to price Chetan’s first book Five Point Someone at Rs 95 that directly led to the opening up of a new market.
“Well, yes, I always say love comes first,” Chetan quipped. “If there’s a book priced at Rs 500 and you can have a meal with your girlfriend instead, that’s what you should do – unless it’s a book about how to get new girlfriends!” Loud cheers followed. But on a more serious note, he immediately pointed out that for many of his readers in smaller towns, Rs 95 in itself is a fairly substantial price for a book. “And the margins are still big – large bookstores like Crossword keep 40 of those 95 rupees.”
“I’m learning new things about this country all the time,” he said, “Someone who had read one of my books wrote to me from a town called Durg, and I didn’t even know where that was. I’ve also learnt that my third book, The Three Mistakes of My Life, has been more popular in smaller towns than the first two books were – because those readers can’t relate to call centres and IIT campuses.”
While we’re sitting on the front lawn the next day, a group of girls come up to Chetan and shyly ask for autographs. One of them haltingly says that she loved all his books, but that she wishes there wasn’t so much abusive language in Five Point Someone: “I wanted my father to read it but he got angry and said he could not read something with so much bad language.”
“I’ll try and get the publishers to produce a U-rated version,” says Chetan, smiling.
When they leave, he says to me: “See, reactions to any book take place on so many different levels. Literary critics think my books are so safe, and that they don’t challenge anyone at all, but the fact is that these books often shock the middle-class people who are their primary readers. Whether you like it or not, you have to take into account the responses and feelings of even naïve readers. In Five Point Someone, when I had the two lovers engage in pre-marital sex, I got so many responses from people who said they liked the book but felt that Neha should not have “given up” her virginity. There have even been readers who know so little about novels that they don’t realise this is fiction: I get letters reproaching me for ruining Neha’s life by telling this story. ‘Tumne Neha ki zindagi barbaad kar di, ab uss se shaadi kaun karegaa?’ (‘You’ve spoilt Neha’s chances of getting married.’) I don’t know how to explain to them that this is a made-up story.”
I’ve known Chetan for a few years now, and have always thought of him as someone who thinks a lot about the issues surrounding his writing – about why critics feel the way they do about him, about what his success tells us about the nature of English-language reading and writing in India. Of course, I don’t agree with some of his views, and I suspect that he doesn’t have much time for my stance that reviewing is an essentially personal act, not a public service; that you have to be honest to your own feelings about a work rather than try to extrapolate what it might mean to “the majority” of readers or to a hypothetical reader with different tastes. Whenever the subject has come up in the past, the talk has gone nowhere.
But here’s a straight transcription of some of what he said to me the other day. These are not the words of someone who doesn’t think about what he’s doing, or about his place in the larger picture:
“A lot of people don't realise that taste can be used to run other people down. But all of our tastes are a product of our environment, the families we were born into, our upbringing. If I’m from a sophisticated background I might have exposure to the finer points of Japanese cuisine. But a traditional Jain family won’t know anything about it – does that mean these people are dumb?
I don’t have a problem with criticism, but some of it gets nasty and personal, and then I do feel like hitting back. When you condemn me, you judge my reader, and my readership is huge. It’s like saying that the democratic choices that have been made by a whole lot of people are wrong.
Many people don’t understand that my books are read by government-school kids, for whom English is very much a second language, and who know that they have to learn it if they want to get anywhere in life – beyond a point you can’t be successful if you don’t know English. And my books often provide them with an entry point into that world. They would be scared if they picked up a more literary work and saw complicated sentences in the first paragraph.
Let me give you a hypothetical situation – try to visualise it. Imagine that for whatever reason, your life takes a turn where it suddenly becomes very important for you to know French in order to get ahead in life. So you start learning it, work hard at it, persevere for weeks and months. Once you’re done with the basics, someone gives you a French novel written in a simple, conversational style and you get through it – this makes you feel like you’ve got somewhere, gained some sort of acceptance into a world that used to be closed to you. Then you pick up the newspapers the next day and see that critics everywhere have written that this book is utter crap, that only an idiot would like it. How do you feel then? And what service is such a review doing?
If you’re a critic, you at least owe it to yourself to be aware of how art connects for different people. But there is so much nastiness directed at my work. A reviewer writing about my third book for a prominent newspaper began by proudly announcing ‘I haven’t read Chetan Bhagat’s previous books but I went to my editor and asked if I could review this one, because I wanted to slam it.’ That was the first sentence of the review!”
(More on Chetan soon. In full disclosure, he wasn’t the festival’s biggest draw on the day of his session: that honour belonged to a certain Mr Bachchan who made an appearance on the front lawns an hour or so after our session got over.)
chetan's biggest appeal is probably how unpretentious he is. ditto his books.
ReplyDeleteI think the real question is - should book critics be reviewing Bhagat's books at all? By his own admission they are intended for people unversed in good writing (or in fiction at all), and seek to entertain the widest possible audience by telling stories that operate at the lowest common denominator - if that's the stated aim then any discussion of literary merit (or lack thereof) is superfluous. And if the metric for a book's success is popularity (and therefore sales) then critical opinions don't matter. The whole point of criticism is that popular opinion isn't a reliable measure of excellence in art (what's so strange about saying that "the democratic choices that have been made by a whole lot of people are wrong"? - they frequently are), which is why we need the critic's viewpoint. If a writer is explicitly committed to accepting the popular verdict over critical judgment, however, then he / she shouldn't pay any attention to the critics, and they might as well pay not attention to him / her. Bhagat is right in condemning the reviewer for his third book, not because he came to the review with his mind already made up, but because having made up his mind, he still chose to waste good column space on a review of Bhagat's book, when he could have been reviewing something (in the reviewer's opinion) more worthwhile.
ReplyDeleteIt seems to me that Bhagat has a very strange conception of the critic's role. Even if we assume that the critic is supposed to provide some kind of service (and that reviewing is not just a personal act - though I'm unconvinced that that isn't all it is), I don't see why the critic should be serving the population at large. A critic who cared about the feelings of all possible readers would be no critic at all. One would hope that a reviewer's loyalty is to the art form he / she is reviewing, and to providing a clear-sighted assessment of the work in question that delivers fresh insight while placing the work in a larger context, rather than to pandering to the imagined insecurities of the most marginal members of the audience.
To take Bhagat's hypothetical question - if I were learning French and read a book in that language and was then told by a reviewer that the book was badly written pulp, I would be grateful - because by pointing out the flaws in the book the reviewer would be helping me to grow as a reader, both in my appreciation of the language, and in my understanding of French literature. That assumes, of course, that I'm interested in learning more about French literature and language, and want to become a better reader; but if I didn't, why would I be reading a book review in the first place?
"Many people don’t understand that my books are read by government-school kids, for whom English is very much a second language ..."
ReplyDeleteEnglish is a second language for most of us in this country, even poets, novelists and university professors of English!
Is that a claim that he writes for them, i.e., writes Children's Literature? Maybe he knows a thing or two the NCERT doesn't. Their English readers have pieces from some of the acknowledged greats in literature, Indian and foreign.
(Thanks for the link.)
Your article makes me... see Chetan Bhagat's point of view!!
ReplyDeleteSTOP IT! TAKE IT AWAY! LALALALALA!
I am jealous of Bhagat, of the attention he has grabbed, the limelight he hogs for right reasons...and of the idea he had and used at the right time...
ReplyDeletemore and more people are reading english fiction...and we need more indian stuff to make them keep at it...i mean why do these critics think literature has a definition? It hasnt to my view..and i dont really think anybody can tell me this isnt a book worth reading...I decide what I read...
But even about bhagat's books, i have varying opinions...i loved his callcentre one, was ok with the IIT one and didnt like his third one very much...
same with Adiga...i think he is a great read...Vikas Swarup's Six Suspects use the same images aand POV...and what's it with these people who say Amitav Ghosh SHOULD have got the booker? Have they read Linda Grant, O'Neill, Barry or the others? even Hanif?
It's pure high handedness dictating your reading tastes...and I think one should ignore such pomposities anyway...
Bhagat, you are not literature to me...but I wouls spend my hard earned money on buying ur book definitely...cant say the same for many others...
Falstaff: thanks. I have a feeling - not 100 percent sure about this - that Chetan would be perfectly okay with his books not being reviewed at all, as long as the major publications carried an unbylined write-up on them in a "New Releases" section or such. Something that's basically taken straight from the jacket description. This is something that has been increasingly happening anyway, especially in the more tabloidish newspaper supplements that don't have the space or inclination to carry analytical, opinionated reviews.
ReplyDeleteIt seems to me that Bhagat has a very strange conception of the critic's role...
Actually, I think a large majority of people (especially those who don't read books/watch movies professionally) have exactly the same conception of a reviewer's role. That doesn't make it right, of course, but it makes it less strange.
And no, I don't think the person in Chetan's hypothesis is meant to be someone with an interest in seriously pursuing French literature; more likely someone who needs a basic understanding of French for professional growth (in a non-cultural field). But you're right, someone like that should ideally avoid reading reviews - or at least make his peace with the idea that the book he just read was fairly basic and undemanding.
Bhagat is right in condemning the reviewer for his third book, not because he came to the review with his mind already made up, but because having made up his mind, he still chose to waste good column space on a review of Bhagat's book, when he could have been reviewing something (in the reviewer's opinion) more worthwhile.
ReplyDeleteFalstaff: I vaguely recall the review Chetan was talking about, and I think it was a straightforward case of malice - and of a reviewer wanting to impress a certain type of middlebrow reader by attacking a very soft target. I also don't recall the person in question having written anything else that I would consider a half-good review.
Gamesmaster G9: ha! Screwed up your whole worldview, haven't I? Who said blogs can't be a public service?
ReplyDeletefrom cb's site/ facebook fan club. sort of echoes.
ReplyDelete----
My Writing Principles - Chetan Bhagat
1) My reader’s interests always come first. My experience shows that if I serve readers well, my own success will follow.
2) I have two goals. My first goal is to make my readers happy. This can come from the enjoyment they get while reading the book, or a positive influence the book can become in their lives. My second goal is a personal agenda to do whatever I can to make India a developed country as soon as possible.
3) I take pride in having an Indian audience. I will strive for excellence to cater to them first. Though my books may be published abroad across various countries, if it came to a choice I’d rather be writing for Indians than anyone else.
4) Be simple yet articulate. The idea of writing is to express, not to impress.
5) Always try something new as that keeps me challenged. I will never arrive, and I don’t want to arrive. The game is to keep going.
6) Every reader is important. While the sheer number of readers may make it difficult to have a one-on-one interaction, reader feedback is to be taken very seriously.
7) The ‘celebrity’ factor is essential to promoting my work and fun to a certain extent. However, it is not an end-goal in itself or to be taken seriously. What matters is my work, not my face.
8 ) I am not working alone. While the books carry my name, there is a whole team behind that works relentlessly. The printers, salespeople, editors, promotion departments have all had a contribution in the book’s success. And of course, the biggest contribution is the readers who passionately recommend my books to others.
9) The connection my readers feel to me and my books is greater than one finds in most other books. I think this is an important part of my success.
10) I regularly receive mails from readers who open up about their lives. To breach their confidence and trust is unthinkable. Integrity and honesty is at the heart of my relationship with my readers
11) There is a lot of competition among books and authors.However, I must always be a fair competitor and must never criticize other books and authors. Similarly, all critical feedback is accepted and not to be argued with.
12) Irrespective of the above, never forget that the idea is for all connected to my books to have fun. Don’t be serious, be sincere. There is a difference.
That will be all for now.
Love,
Chetan
Wasn't it Anurag Mathur's The Inscrutable Americans, priced at Rs 95, that opened up the new market? That released in 1991, long before Bhagat.
ReplyDeleteI agree that at Rs 95, Chetan Bhagat is quite cheap. But his writing is "art"? Well, either that's meant to be funny. Or we're missing an f here. Or both.
ReplyDeleteJ'wock: What? You're not going to disagree with me? No fair. What does a guy have to do to start an argum...I mean discussion these days.
ReplyDeleteThe thing I really admire about Bhagat, aside from his obvious marketing acumen, is the way he's managed to spin his own mediocrity into a virtue. Translate all this talk about reaching out to the masses and what he's basically saying is that there's a large number of people out there who don't know enough about books to recognize a quality product, so we can sell them any old thing (as long as we price it low enough) and pass it off as writing. It's exploitative, but brilliant.
Falsie: well, there were a couple of minor points I could have nitpicked about if I were really up to it, but I'm not strong-hearted enough these days to risk getting into a long comments exchange with you! It would have been a bit like a mononucleisis-affected Federer agreeing to play a best-of-seven-sets match against Nadal on clay. (You have no idea what I'm talking about, do you?) Besides, I'm behind on around 600 deadlines just now.
ReplyDeleteWe'll spar later in the year, once I've recovered...
Just discovered a great business opportunity for you:
ReplyDeletehttp://ideas.economictimes.com/
J'wock: You wrong me. I do know who Roger Federer is. He's the guy David Foster Wallace wrote that piece in the NY Times about. He plays tennis or something, doesn't he?
ReplyDeleteBest of luck with the deadlines.
Amit, of offense, but what is art? Who is to say what is art and what is not?
ReplyDeleteChetan Bhagat is a salesman, not a writer.
ReplyDeleteClaiming to do "public service" by providing an avenue into an english speaking world is complete nonsense.
This guy is a management graduate! All he ever learned was how to sell..
His arguments are pretty silly, and falstaff is right in pointing out the obvious inconsistency within them.
I don't see this guy as unpretentious at all.
ReplyDeleteHe says "don't criticize me" but then goes on to give 12 reasons about the principles of writing that have nothing to do with writing, but selling.
Uff.
Just to throw in my two-bit - uhh, doesn't this whole thing sound a lot like what all of us said, or would say, about a Shakti Samanta or a Manmohan Desai or a David Dhawan?
ReplyDeleteChetan Bhagat is a terrible writer. But that's not the point. If he chooses to write for the Lowest Common Denominator (and I don't really mean to be patronising), then so be it.
I'm not part of the Lit Frat, but I do think that the Lit Frat expects a bit too much from our 'Indian Writers in English'. We expect all of it to be really good. That can't be the case.
Much like the 'Multiplex' filmmakers, there will be some good and some bad. And they will have to coexist.
Don't want to take names here, but look at the various film critics who have made films recently and various journalists/reviewers/publishers who have written books recently. Most of it is terrible. But they are defensible because they have not tried to cater to the LCM. They are credited for trying to do something interesting, but falling short. Maybe they are just not good enough.
I don't know if I've gotten anywhere with this, but just thought I'd pitch in.
NOTE: I've only read the Call Centre book; forget the name. It's not really a book; more like a badly thought-out high school play. But so be it.
Falstaff writes:
ReplyDeleteTo take Bhagat's hypothetical question - if I were learning French and read a book in that language and was then told by a reviewer that the book was badly written pulp, I would be grateful - because by pointing out the flaws in the book the reviewer would be helping me to grow as a reader, both in my appreciation of the language, and in my understanding of French literature. That assumes, of course, that I'm interested in learning more about French literature and language, and want to become a better reader; but if I didn't, why would I be reading a book review in the first place?
Falstaff: not everyone thinks that way. You are not part of the LCM, a group of readers who have just achieved credibility in the eyes of their peers by actually reading a full book. Remember, we are talking about a generation of 'readers' who have probably never read anything. Even Hardy Boys or Enid Blyton. Or Ladybird stuff. Or Amar Chitra Katha. It's a group we pan for not reading at all. I'm not comparing, but to my mind, Chetan Bhagat seems to have achieved much of what someone like JK Rowling has in the West.
BMR: I agree. But a) book reviews aren't written for people who are going to read one book in their lives. Or one book every few years. If you're reading a book review there's usually an implicit assumption that you're invested in books, plural, and therefore curious to know what's out there, and interested in someone else's opinion of what you read. Why would someone who doesn't read at all spend his / her time reading book reviews?; and b) even if you were to write reviews for people who'd never read anything in their lives, surely the greatest service you could do them would be to redirect them towards something a little more wholesome than CB? Since these (hypothetical) people have never read any books they're by definition making an ill-informed choice. Surely we should be helping them make better choices - there's plenty of stuff out there that's perfectly accessible while still being profoundly well written. Why couldn't these people be reading, say, R.K. Narayan rather than CB? (the Rowling comparison is not inapt, btw, but there again I'd rather children were reading Ursula LeGuin or Cornelia Funke than Rowling). No one is keener to encourage the reading habit than I am, but for that habit to be meaningful, we need to be telling people that there are better, brighter things out there. Otherwise we risk them thinking that CB is all there is to literature. And I don't know that *reading* defined as reading CB is any better than watching an Ekta Kapoor soap.
ReplyDeleteI think regular readers get too harsh on Chetan. He is bashed up like mainstream Bollywood directors or hardcore businessmen.
ReplyDeleteIt's quite interesting to see his point of view.
Well, I haven't read any of Bhagat's novels yet, but I think he has achieved phenomenal success through them. Whether the books are literature worthy or not is a different debate, but whether the public embraced them is now clear.
ReplyDeleteGood luck to Bhagat for spawning off the reading habit amongst many of this nation. Hopefully some of them will continue and move up the so called literary chain (that line was based on the various scathing reviews I have read of Mr. Bhagat's works)
I came by floating through the interwebs, or more exactly through India Uncut. The argument over CB's work is interesting as it has shades of the great India vs Bharat ideas (Blaming newbie readers for his popularity can be compared to blaming illiterate, casteist rural India for voting in corrupt politicians).
ReplyDeleteFirst, a bit of where I come from. I am not a voracious reader though I do read when I get a chance. I chanced upon Bhagat's books on a vacation in India (I work in Australia). On my brother's recommendation, I started reading Five Point Someone and was immediately sucked in. As a engineering college graduate myself, I could relate to the characters (and boy how!) and to their marginalisation in a very competitive environment. There were parts that made me laugh out loud. I agree that the writing was not of a high standard, but it was pure paisa vasool. Then, I took up One Night .. and was quite disappointed. Bhagat literally used Deus Ex Machina to wrap up a fairly standard story about a man's disenchantment with his ordinary life. Still, there were parts I could relate to such as the arranged marriage and the slimy boss.
The point I am trying to make is that Bhagat's books are set in a context that I can relate to. What is more, he neither justifies nor abuses the context unlike some other crossover Indian works that I have read. (By context, I mean the living conditions, the social practices, and the ambitions of ordinary Indians.) I would like to hold up the execrable God of Small Things as an example of the latter. Therefore, I find his books enjoyable. This, I suppose, is the secret to his success as well.
If Indian literature is to truly grow, then we need our Bhagats just as much as our Lahiris. Such writers are able to tap into the market of those who are comfortable with their context and who want nothing but an easy read.
"there's plenty of stuff out there that's perfectly accessible while still being profoundly well written. Why couldn't these people be reading, say, R.K. Narayan rather than CB?"
ReplyDelete@Falstaff: Who else apart from R.K.Narayan falls into this category in your opinion? I'm curious, and want to know that there are other (Indian) writers who can fall into this category; as much as I agree that Chetan Bhagat's work is mediocre and "exploitative", I cannot help agreeing with most of what he has said in this interview.
Ashwin
I agree with Falstaff, there are much better authors/books to be read for a first time reader than Chetan Bhagat.
ReplyDeleteIts like a new Hindi learner starts off with Vedprakash Sharma instead of Premchand or Aggeya.
(More on Chetan soon. In full disclosure, he wasn’t the festival’s biggest draw on the day of his session: that honour belonged to a certain Mr Bachchan who made an appearance on the front lawns an hour or so after our session got over.)
ReplyDeleteThe biggest drawa in a literature festival are Bachchan and Chetan Bhagat - says a lot doesn't it?
Reviewers have the right to comment on the quality of writing, irrespective of the success of the book! If Chandni Chowk to China were to become a hit, would you be obliged to call it a masterpiece?
Reviewers have the right to comment on the quality of writing, irrespective of the success of the book! If Chandni Chowk to China were to become a hit, would you be obliged to call it a masterpiece?
ReplyDeleteDiviya: um...does something in the post (or in the hundreds of reviews I've written in the past) give you the impression that I disagree with this idea? Actually, I don't think even Chetan disagrees with it, though he does have a problem with criticism that gets personal.
twas nice meeting u there! :)
ReplyDeleteBTW I read in the Jaipur times of the next day, that Chetan indeed drew a larger crowd than AB! and that something like this had never ever happened earlier.
Ashwin: Let's see. Off the top of my head, I'd say Anita Desai, Vikram Chandra (at least Love and Longing in Bombay), Amit Chaudhuri. Also, to be more contemporary, Anjum Hasan and (if we're including the sub-continent as a whole) Daniyal Mueenuddin. None of them are particularly difficult to read (though obviously I'm not the best judge of what other people might find difficult). Frankly, I'm having trouble thinking of a contemporary Indian fiction writer (the pachyderm in the room - Rushdie - doesn't count) whose work isn't a) about *ordinary* people in everyday India and b) doesn't use more or less standard narrative with reasonably uncomplicated language. It's not like we have an avant garde.
ReplyDeleteThe other question, of course, is why these hypothetical people should necessarily be reading work by Indian writers. You want someone who writes about arranged marriage and class anxiety and economic insecurity and romance without sex? Read Jane Austen. You want someone who really understands how it feels to be on the fringes of social class, always trying to move up? Read Chekhov. One of the greatest joys of literature is discovering a connection to a story that runs deeper than surface detail.
...though obviously I'm not the best judge of what other people might find difficult...
ReplyDeleteFalstaff: this part of your comment is absolutely true. I've enjoyed the work of all the writers you mention, but I can't believe you're saying that Desai, Chandra and Hasan are as easy to read, and as approachable (for someone who's only just learnt English and is looking for reassuring comfort reading), as Chetan Bhagat's novels are. Big, big difference in my view - the work of these authors is a good deal more demanding than Chetan's. Also bear in mind that it isn't only a question of the ease or difficulty of the writing style (Amit Chaudhuri's prose is beautifully simple). Most of the readers we're talking about here are people who aren't looking to books (or fiction at least) to help them engage with complex or challenging ideas; they're looking for safe reading that they can instantly relate to, with stories involving familiar settings and situations. I think I've written about this in that earlier post about the mass-market.
I respect many of the general points you make in your comments, but I do feel that you're greatly disconnected from the average Indian market, and from some of the hierarchies of English-language comprehension in India. (Hell, some of the stuff you read is too difficult for me, and I work on the books beat! Not being sarcastic or inverse-snobbish here.) It might surprise you to learn, for instance, that many young writers currently being published by low-investment publishing houses (like Srishti) regularly produce work that makes Chetan's writing seem definitely literary by comparison. (You might want to confirm this with Aishwarya btw - she enjoys picking those books up from secondhand stalls so she can quote passages on her blog.)
J'wock: Fair enough. I can only judge by what I consider easy / difficult, which is obviously unrepresentative. And I am aware that there's a lot of stuff out there that's considerably worse than CB - if only from reading extracts on Aishwarya's blog.
ReplyDeleteBut if these authors are more demanding, they're also a lot more rewarding. Which is why we need to be encouraging people to make the additional investment required in reading them, even if they start by reading CB.
I do recognize that "Most of the readers we're talking about here are people who aren't looking to books (or fiction at least) to help them engage with complex or challenging ideas;". My point is that they should be, and if they're not I suspect it's at least in part because they don't recognize that fiction has the power to do that, and as long as they restrict themselves to reading CB they never will. If there is a special role that reviewers should be playing in a world of non-readers it shouldn't be (as CB seems to suggest) that they sanction mediocrity, it should be that they try to provide people with the education in reading that they've never received.
Contrary to how it may seem, this is not meant to be a screed against CB. I do think that CB provides valuable (at the price) entertainment to an often overlooked segment of the market, and I'd be the last person to pretend that writing for the mass-market is easy (I know, I, for instance, couldn't do it). I just dislike the implied superciliousness of the idea that great literature (especially non-Indian literature) is somehow irrelevant to the masses, and that we should be content to let these *lesser* people remain at their level and not even attempt to draw them towards higher, better things.
Plus, of course, I'm amused by the implicit suggestion that CB only writes the way he does because he's being responsive to the common people. As though if we lived in a world of more developed readers he would suddenly start turning out deathless prose.
If what CB says is right, then Chacha Chaudhary should be hailed as a cult classic in English-Comic-Literature just becoz it sells BIG time.
ReplyDeleteLet's leave alone CB for what he is - a very good marketer.
"Once you’re done with the basics, someone gives you a French novel written in a simple, conversational style and you get through it – this makes you feel like you’ve got somewhere, gained some sort of acceptance into a world that used to be closed to you. Then you pick up the newspapers the next day and see that critics everywhere have written that this book is utter crap, that only an idiot would like it."
ReplyDeleteWhat kind of an argument is this?
1.Is the reader stupid enough to not know why he "liked" the book?Is he supposed to like it because he understood it?If I understand this argument correctly CB expects some stupid things from his reader.
2.Secondly, if a writing is accessible linguistically,is it supposed to be accessible literarily as well? This is again an assumption which has no basis.There are many poets and writers who use words which are commonly used and which would be fairly easy to comprehend for a learner.But their writing is not that accessible.A linguistically deficient person may like an inaccessible book and vice versa.
He is just thinking of lame excuses to justify his lameness.:)
Falstaff: You seriously think an average Indian youngster who says "anyways..." and writes it as "newys" in SMSes will actually pick up an Ursula LeGuin or Cornelia Funke? Or Jane Austen? Or RK Narayan for that matter?
ReplyDeleteI'm not even getting into LeGuin or Funke or Austen. They are 'firang'. A Narayan book will usually come with a pencil-drawn illustration on the cover with a name like 'The Vendor of Sweets' or the 'Financial Expert'. Why would anyone pick these up?
And remember, we grew up with Narayan. It's ancient stuff now. Vikas Swarup and CB are the in-things now. Like Anurag Mathur a decade ago. A Call Centre relationship or an IIM complication is a very real situation right now.
They listen to Britney Spears and not Janis Joplin. Michael Learns to Rock and not Grateful Dead.
Why would they read anything but Chetan Bhagat?
---
Falstaff, you write: "Since these (hypothetical) people have never read any books they're by definition making an ill-informed choice. Surely we should be helping them make better choices - there's plenty of stuff out there that's perfectly accessible while still being profoundly well written."
How, exactly? Not through reviews. The reviews are not for them. It's all about what the next guy is doing? A CB book is the same as a popcorn film. Quick two-hour read. A feather in your cap. They are not reading CB because they don't know there's better stuff available. They are reading CB because it needs to be read if you are a 20-something boy or girl.
PS: I think we have just done RKN a great disservice by bringing him into a discussion on CB.
Shamya: careful, you're treading on dangerous ground. Young Falstaff will absolutely demolish you in a 7000-word comment soon. And that's if he agrees with 90 percent of what you've said.
ReplyDeleteBMR: It seems to me you're confusing two very different things - what I think people should do and what I actually expect them to do.
ReplyDeleteI think people should recycle their trash, but I don't expect they will. I think people should vote based on issues rather than on religious or caste lines, but I don't expect they will. I think people should all work towards gender equality, but I don't expect they will. And yes, I think people should read RKN instead of CB, but I don't expect they will.
In all of those cases, I'm willing to accept that what should happen won't. But I'm not willing to pretend that this is a good thing, or stop insisting on what I think should happen, even if I don't think it'll do any good.
Let's see now, another 6,856 words to go.
"It might surprise you to learn, for instance, that many young writers currently being published by low-investment publishing houses (like Srishti) regularly produce work that makes Chetan's writing seem definitely literary by comparison."
ReplyDeleteI cannot agree more. On a whim and drawn to the male protagonist's name, I bought 'Ofcourse, I Love You' published by Srishti. I tried ardently till page 15 and then gave up. I realized, books and art aren't related anymore. You can just about write anything and someone will be willing to publish. As to CB, critics have a right to express just like CB has a right to 'express and not impress'. Though I agree, reviewing just to 'slam' a book is not what a reader expects from a reviewer.
"Many people don’t understand that my books are read by government-school kids, for whom English is very much a second language ..."
The Board-certified 2nd language English books have many abridged classics as a part of the syllabus. So it is not like the 'audience' is not exposed to good writing/expression.
But the point is not that. We can write a book and we can be happy at its commercial success, but calling the critics vain wouldn't get us anywhere.
This is obviously very late in the day to comment - but when I read through the post and the comments - it occurred to me that CB's popularity is not merely because his English is easy to comprehend. I come from a family where my father, uncles learnt English late in life - and grew to enjoy very complex pieces of literature, because they enjoy complexity. I think CB is popular because a huge chunk of the population finds it difficult to deal with writing of the "makes my head hurt if I think too much" variety. That's his secret - he is not just drawing non-English readers into the fold, but non-readers per se.
ReplyDeleteI think CB is popular because a huge chunk of the population finds it difficult to deal with writing of the "makes my head hurt if I think too much" variety..
ReplyDeleteShammi: I'd point out though that there's a very wide spectrum of possibilities between Chetan's writing and the "makes my head hurt if I think too much" variety. (Even accounting for the fact that people at different reading levels will have vast different barometers for "makes my head hurt" writing).
Or maybe you're talking more about the complexity of ideas expressed in more literary works, rather than the complexity of writing styles? That's something I touched on in my older post about mass-market fiction; about people who read not because they want windows into different worlds but because they want affirmation of their own worlds.
Jai, thank you for responding - yes, you've put it much better - I meant complexity of ideas. CB's books are easy to get, not just easy to read - and I think his appeal lies in precisely that - affirmation not just of a world, but a world-view - with just a teeny dollop of challenge to stretch the boundaries and make it daring (like a heroine having premarital sex). Look at the relatively less successful Above Average by A.Baghchi (which also did well, I believe, but not as well as 5 Point - which had a more complex writing style, but even more complex characters. I am not being supercillious about CB - there is a place for all sorts of writing - but his reminds me of a upgraded version of Women's Era, as opposed to a "easier" version of say,New Yorker. Writing Brave New World in a more difficult English would not make its philosophy any easier to get - nor for that matter, would writing One Night in tough English make it challenging conceptually
ReplyDeleteDang, I wish I could edit my comment - the above needed a close parenthesis after 5 Point - I meant that Above Average was more complex - well, not hugely so, but relative to 5 Point
ReplyDeleteAargh - I shouldn't write without caffeine in my veins - sorry, meant Brave New World written in simpler English wouldn't simplify its philosophy. Sigh.
ReplyDeleteShammi: coincidentally I was having just this conversation with a friend yesterday: about how Chetan's core readers would find it difficult to process the work of, say, Jhumpa Lahiri (even though her writing style is very simple) because of the ideas expressed in her stories, the types of lives her characters lead and the things they take for granted.
ReplyDeleteAnd "upgraded version of Women's Era" - excellent analogy.
I do not find any redeemable or endearing qualities about Chetan's personality or his books.
ReplyDeleteBhagat sells.Thats it. His books have been roaring successes. I do not understand how a reviewer or anyone else for that matter can claim to know what constitutes "art" or "literature". Lakhs have read his books.
ReplyDeleteIts the kind of argument we constantly hear about. Test cricket vs IPL etc. Bhagat is gonna go down in history for making book reading cool. He is the Lalit Modi of English literature. And thats no bad thing.
Lalit Modi is an international convict on the run and pseudo-exiled from his own country. Lovely comparison....
ReplyDeleteI have read Chetan's Five Point Some one and One Night at a call center. I liked breezing through FPS in my college days borrowing it from a friend in hostel. I had to read it quickly as it was quite in demand in the hostel in those days. I think initially the book was popular amongst engineering college students because it explored the myth of IITs. I've met many starry eyed kids studying or want to study engineering and their awe for the IITs. To them IITs was a heaven where only few chosen ones are given an entry and you got to have something really special inside you to get into them and every one who gets the degree gets an "awesome" life. I think just by the act of speaking about failures in IITs he got a leverage and I think this is a big part of his mass appeal. So was his "One Night ..." which was a terrible bore for me. This I think is a common theme in all his books: speaking about (even if not speaking well) with themes which capture popular imagination but no one has been talking about them. Not-so-rosy lives of mediocre students of an elite college in "Five Point ...". Lives of call center employees where many people don't know what are the kids with bare minimum education doing inside swanky offices with such a lavish lifestyle in his "One time ...". I haven't read his third book but I am told it is about intercaste marriage between two up and coming MBA graduate students which deals with casteism and regionalism in an environment/social setup where they are considered things of the past. Look his novel as high concept narrative and you will see my point.
ReplyDeleteNow I haven't had much time to read or listen to CB outside of his two books but his claims of voice for Bharat vs India etc. are just a spin, an attempt to legitimize his work and align it with a popular paradigm to claim some amount of gravity and that it is not another kitsch.
CB's writing doesn't has literary merits but then why measure kitsch made in Hindi cinema by standards of western cinema. It is a different audience, different cultures even different art form. I would say pleasing a radically diverse mass audience who have nothing in common but a vague sense of common nationality is a significant creative work if not an artistic feat. Really imagine Manmohan Desai making 3 people donate blood simultaneously to an injured woman in Amar Akbar Anthony. If you look for great cinematography or writing or acting you are asking the wrong questions. What made MD make such weird scene and why did people enjoyed such a twisted and unbelievable way of showing secularism? These are questions belonging less to art and more to popular cultural studies.
I think anything that is so popular should not be merely shrugged off. If not an artistic piece of work with critical element, analyze as pop culture phenomenon.
I don't care for whatever critical comments posted my many people here.. Let me ask you all and all those people who are always on a look up for pulling the legs of someone who is getting elated into the greater heights in something.. One thing i would like to say is, We the humanbeings, should possess some unconditional love towards something in our lives. That will makes us feel alive and a better human. The people like ME, who adore Chetan Bhagat, belong to that category of the people who loves something unconditionally, enjoying it to the fullest and relating it to their lives, and develop much more dreams and aspirations to achieve something substantial in our life... CHETAN BHAGAT had taught us all how important one's dreams for achieving happiness and success in one's life." That is what we love the most about him... But when i see all you guys decieding yourselves how a person should work, i get reminded of this famous quote, " A critic is the person who knows the cost of everything, but the value of nothing."
ReplyDeleteHave any of you ever experienced how it would be, when you don’t have anything good to do in life, anything interesting and useful for life, no certain ambition, no goal, no dreams, no aspirations,,, and suddenly one day a person thankfully turns up in your life and shows you all those, gives you the real meaning of life and dreams, and aspirations, if he tells you “The real happiness of life lies in keeping up your spark alive forever.” How do u treat him? Won’t that person be the most beloved one of your life.
Have your ever seen such things, do u know that there are peole who have got all these Sparks and values and aspirations from this precious person named CHETAN BAHAGT...? If you haven’t known it yet, then first know it and then talk about him what you want o talk.